Why would a man be less qualified? Should a female be automatically assumed unqualified to run a men's magazine or or a cigar manufacturer? Why are either of those scenarios scary?
Well, history has at least shown that making that assumption would be dumb: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christie_Hefner
More importantly, is it OK that women make up less than 5% of Fortune 500 CEO positions? That's not sad?
To clarify, there's a huge difference between unqualified and less qualified. I would never say men/women are unqualified to do anything...
Fact: There are women who are qualified to be CEO of Fortune 500s.
Assuming selection from the above, she would be more qualified since she would be more likely to 1) be passionate about the product, 2) be an actual consumer of the product, 3) be able to empathize with users of the product, 4) better understand internal value tied to the product...the list goes on.
There are very few women in executive positions, that is a fact. But it does not follow that a white, middle-aged gentleman is less qualified because he's a man. He was unqualified because he was a finance wonk who didn't understand makeup and fashion.
Your feelings about whether this is sad, in the absence of further information about why it's so, signals mostly whether you care about equality of outcome or equality of opportunity.